CHC Casinos Canada Ltd. v. Chippewas of Mnjikaning First Nation
The appeal was struck as moot because the respondent had issued the requested building permits and the Court declined to exercise its discretion to hear the now‑moot appeal, finding remaining disputes were better addressed in related proceedings such as the appellant's judicial review application challenging the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 2006 FCA 104
- Parties
- Appellant: CHC Casinos Canada Ltd.; Respondent: The Chippewas of Mnjikaning First Nation Band Council; Intervener: Ontario First Nations Limited Partnership
- Court
- Federal Court of Appeal
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 9 March 2006
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal / Motion to Strike for Mootness
- Outcome
- Respondent's motion allowed; appeal struck for mootness
- Legal Topics
- Mootness, Mandamus, Judicial Review, By Law Validity, Building Permits
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
CHC Casinos Canada Ltd.
Appellant
The Chippewas of Mnjikaning First Nation Band Council
Respondent
Ontario First Nations Limited Partnership
Intervener
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Motion to Strike for Mootness
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appeal is moot following issuance of the building permits
- 2 Whether the Court should exercise its discretion to hear a moot appeal
- 3 Whether remaining disputes should be resolved in related proceedings such as a judicial review of the by-law
Ratio Decidendi
The appeal was struck as moot because the respondent had issued the requested building permits and the Court declined to exercise its discretion to hear the now‑moot appeal, finding remaining disputes were better addressed in related proceedings such as the appellant's judicial review application challenging the by-law.
Court Disposition
Respondent's motion allowed; appeal struck for mootness
Orders
- Respondent's motion to strike appeal for mootness is allowed
- The appeal is struck for mootness
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
CHC Casinos Canada Ltd. v. Chippewas of Mnjikaning First Nation Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions Date 2006-03-09 Neutral citation 2006 FCA 104 File numbers A-112-05 Decision Content Date: 20060309 Docket: A-112-05 Citation: 2006 FCA 104 CORAM: DÉCARY J.A. EVANS J.A. MALONE J.A. BETWEEN: CHC CASINOS CANADA LTD. Appellant (Applicant) and THE CHIPPEWAS OF MNJIKANING FIRST NATION BAND COUNCIL Respondent and ONTARIO FIRST NATIONS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP Intervener Heard at Toronto, Ontario, on March 9, 2006. Judgment delivered from the Bench at Toronto, Ontario, on March 9, 2006. REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: EVANS J.A. Date: 20060309 Docket: A-112-05 Citation: 2006 FCA 104 CORAM: DÉCARY J.A. EVANS J.A. MALONE J.A. BETWEEN: CHC CASINOS CANADA LTD. Appellant (Applicant) and THE CHIPPEWAS OF MNJIKANING FIRST NATION BAND COUNCIL Respondent and ONTARIO FIRST NATIONS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP Intervener APPLICATION UNDER Section 18.1 of the Federal Courts Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. F-7, as amended REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Delivered from the Bench at Toronto, Ontario, on March 9, 2006) EVANS J.A. [1] This is a motion by the respondent to strike for mootness an appeal from a decision of Heneghan J. of the Federal Court refusing an order of mandamus to require the respondent to issue the building permits for which the appellant had applied: CHC Casinos Canada Ltd. v. The Chippewas of Mnjikaning First Nation Band Council, 2005 FC 233. Since the respondent has subsequently issued building permits to the appellants, the appeal is moot. [2] We are not satisfied that the circumstances of this case warrant the exercise of the Court's discretion to hear the appeal despite the fact that is moot. Whatever other issues are still in dispute between the parties are better addressed in the related proceedings, including the appellant's application for judicial review in the Federal Court to challenge the validity of the amended by-law under which the permits were purportedly issued. [3] For these reasons, the respondent's motion is allowed and the appeal is struck for mootness. Costs will not be awarded. "John M. Evans" J.A. FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD DOCKET: A-112-05 STYLE OF CAUSE: CHC CASINOS CANADA LTD. v. THE CHIPPEWAS OF MNJIKANING FIRST NATION BAND COUNCIL ET AL. PLACE OF HEARING: TORONTO, ONTARIO DATE OF HEARING: MARCH 9, 2006 REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: DÉCARY, EVANS and MALONE JJ.A. DELIVERED FROM THE BENCH BY: EVANS J.A. APPEARANCES: Kathryn Podrebarac FOR THE APPELLANT M. Philip Tunley FOR THE RESPONDENT Tycho Manson FOR THE INTERVENER SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Tough & Podrebarac LLP Toronto, Ontario FOR THE APPELLANT McCarthy Tétrault LLP Toronto, Ontario FOR THE RESPONDENT Torys LLP Toronto, Ontario FOR THE INTERVENER